> You are completely wrong, flat out. Your argument is basically that "spam matters". This is false. You're right that contemporary email providers like GMail

> You are completely wrong, flat out. Your argument is basically that "spam matters". This is false. You're right that contemporary email providers like GMail do a great job of filtering spam emails, but that doesn't change the fact that sending commercial emails to harvested addresses is illegal, per the CAN-SPAM Act. The act clearly states that the destination address "cannot be sent to a harvested email address." More information (albeit paraphrased) is available here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_address_harvesting#Legality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_address_harvesting#Legal... or you can read the full text of the act itself here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ187/pdf/PLAW-108publ187.pdf http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ187/pdf/PLAW-108pub... Just because spam filters work very well does not mean that creating a web application that enables illegal activity is a good idea. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM#Sending_behavior_compliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM#Sending_behavior_comp...